From: mr@sandman.net
In article , C'Pi
wrote:
> > Sandman:
> > Lots of spoilers here, do NOT read if you haven't seen it and
> > don't want it spoiled!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
SPOILER SPACE!
> All in all - ok. Not great, just ok.
> Yes, the movie looks great but it has two major problems, well, one
> major problem, J.J. Abrams, who causes the two major problems. It's
> the same two problems that are in his Star Trek movies. Everything
> is rushed and everything feels like a repeat of what we have seen
> before. For Star Trek I never had a problem with these things, but
> for Star Wars I do. Will J.J. ever make a movie that is not just
> repeating someone else's ideas? Can he? I'm beginning to wonder.
I hear you, and I agree with you - but I think it's deliberate. Meaning, in
order to win *back* the old fans, he had to go back to the roots, to what
made those movies great. Could he have done it differently? Maybe, but not
drastically differently. Remember, the train wreck that was the prequels was
largely due to it being a completely different kind of story.
Star Wars have always been the little guy against the big guy, good vs. evil,
the light and the dark side of the force. It's what captivated us 30+ years
ago and it is what can bring Star Wars back to being Star Wars again.
The original trilogy had no great story, no unique way of telling it. It as a
classic good vs. bad movie set in a visually stunning space scenario with
awesome special effects and awesome music and some really interesting design
choices that stood the test of time.
If Episode VII ever could have a chance, it had to build on what is Star Wars
at the core.
If Ep7 would have been Luke, Leia and Han thirty years later in a "what
happened then??" kind of setup, it would have been pretty underwhelming. We
obviously need a conflict, we need our "good guys" to be on the good side of
that conflict, we need the bad side to be overwhelmingly powerful.
That said, I think the parallels could have been toned down a bit without it
having a negative effect. I.e. maybe the first run on the "Oscillator" was
successful, but Finn had lied about that being the key to destroying it? So
it was all in vein?
Perhaps we didn't need a trench run, and perhaps Jakku didn't have to be a
Tatooine-like desert planet, nor maybe the droid needn't be on his own,
looking for the right person. I don't mind that this is what we got, but I
think some similarities could have been... less similar.
> I liked Fin. Loved Rey. Really have no complaints about the
> characters. Gives me hope for the future movies. Unless we just get
> a repeat of Luke - Yoda with Luke - Rey and then a repeat of the the
> bad guys trying to turn the good guy. Try to be original J.J.!!
Or don't - try to please the fans! Try to make a captivating movie using a
formula that feels right, and be creative within that formula.
Kylo Ren is a good example. He is a Darth Maul, an unknown Sith lord, but
with a twist. He is the son of Leia, naturally force sensitive and with a lot
of "Vader" in him. It works organically and logically. He is conflicted, he's
just a boy, and in the end, he makes a decision that cements his path going
forward.
The next two movies will certainly focus more on Ren, and his possible
redemption. On Luke's failure and *his* redemption.
Perhaps Snokes will try to win over Rey, maybe not. Ten already tried to lure
her over and she resisted, so another similar scene might not work story-
wise.
--
Sandman
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
